![]() ![]() ![]() In short, it’s much better than any of the upsampling algorithms. There are so many finer details in this image, and the non-detailed areas have substantially less noise as well. I took this photo using the Panasonic S1R’s sensor-shift mode, so it’s as close as you’ll get to a “real” 188 megapixel shot of this scene. The original is a 47-megapixel image from the Panasonic S1R, and all the crops you’ll see in a moment are from that small red rectangle:Īctual 188-megapixel image, taken with sensor-shift Here they are. First, this is the uncropped image I’ll be using. (Say that five times fast!) Instead, it’s a solid advancement to impressive technology that already existed.Īh, you won’t believe me without tests. But don’t read too much into headlines claiming that Super Resolution is a revolution. ![]() Don’t get me wrong – I’ve been impressed by Preserve Details 2.0 for years, and any improvement is welcome. Super Resolution also isn’t drastically better than the Preserve Details 2.0 upsampling algorithm that Photoshop has already had since 2017. If that’s what you were hoping for, you’ll need to temper your expectations. The answer is in the title of this review: good, but don’t expect a miracle.Ī 12-megapixel image that has been enhanced to 48 megapixels with Super Resolution won’t match an original photo from a 48-megapixel camera, or even get especially close. Everything above is nice to know, but it won’t matter if Super Resolution isn’t any good. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |